Your Aussie World Cup side

[RoosLuver]

I know its still over a month and a bit away from starting but I was bored and thought who you would put in the side.

here are the choices

1. Michael Bevan NSW
2. Andrew Bichel QLD
3. Greg Blewett SA
4. Nathan Bracken NSW
5. Ryan Campbell WA
6. Stuart Clark NSW
7. Michael Clarke NSW
8. Adam Gilchrist WA
9. Jason Gillespie SA
10. Brad Haddin NSW
11. Ian Harvey VIC
12. Nathan Hauritz QLD
13. Matthew Hayden QLD
14. Mark Higgs SA
15. Brad Hogg WA
16. Michael Hussey WA
17. Justin Langer WA
18. Brett Lee NSW
19. Darren Lehmann SA
20. Jimmy Maher QLD
21. Damien Martyn WA
22. Glenn McGrath NSW
23. Ashley Noffke QLD
24. Ricky Ponting TAS
25. Andrew Symonds QLD
26. Shane Warne VIC
27. Shane Watson TAS
28. Cameron White VIC
29. Brad Williams WA
30. Damien Wright TAS

My team in next post

[RoosLuver]

Ricky Ponting - C
Adam Gilchrist - VC
Michael Bevan
Andy Bichel
Ryan Campbell
Jason Gillespie
Nathan Hauritz
Matty Hayden
Brett Lee
Darren Lehmann
Jimmy Maher
Damien Martyn
Glenn McGrath
Shane Warne - I reckon he will make it
Shane Watson

Opinions welcome!!

[bunsen burner]

1. Gilchrist
2. Hayden
3. Ponting
4. Martyn
5. Lehmann
6. Bevan
7. Watson
8. Warne
9. Lee
10. Gillespie
11. McGrath

12. Bichel (spare bowler)
13. Maher (spare batter)
14. Greg Blewett (spare allrounder)
15. MacGill (spare spinner)

unluckies:

Ryan Campbell
Ashley Noffke
Michael Clarke

** if Warne isn't fit, MacGill must go. MacGill has some shazam, wheras Hauritz and Hogg never look like they are going to take a wicket, yet alone win a match off their own backs.

*** I left a spare keeper out for this reason: If Warne plays, he may not be fully recovered or may have a relapse. Therefore a spare spinner is a must. Also, Watson is much more susceptible to poor form and confidence than Gilly is, so the need for a backup allrounder is more feasible than a backup keeper. Ponting can keep if Gilly is out for one or two.

The MacGill choice is a long shot, and I don't think the selectors will go that way, but I prefer him ahead of the other spinners.

[vergs]

Matthew Hayden
Adam Gilchrist
Ricky Ponting
Damien Martyn
Michael Clarke
Michael Bevan
Greg Blewett
Shane Warne
Brett Lee
Jason Gillespie
Glenn McGrath

Few changes with the inclusions of Blewett and Clarke. I think Blewett would provide more value with the bat than Watson, and could be just as handy with the ball. I included Clarke because he is a young gun and would really benefit from World Cup experience. He is awesome with the bat, can bowl some part time spinners, and is good in the field. Also hoping the great man can overcome his shoulder problem and retain his place in the side.

[bluechampion]

Hayden - opener
Gilchrist - all-rounder
Ponting - best ODI batsman in the world
Bevan - must bat at 4.
Martyn - scores too slowly for my liking.
Lehmann - handy with bat and ball.
Blewett - utility player who could be a match-winner.
Lee - If only he batted more consistently, he'd be the all-rounder.
Warne - hope he's fit.
Gillespie - must stay fit.
McGrath - spearhead.

Maher
- very unlucky not to be in the starting team. Would personally prefer him to Martyn

Watson
- Taken as experience, but the maturity of Blewett preferred in the team.

Campbell
- As insurance. You need a first-pick keeper, not someone filling in in case of injury. Could also play against some weaker teams, and provide secondary batting back-up.

Bichel
- Very likely to play, especially if Warne is out, or Lee is too expensive.

No need for a back-up spinner. Either Warnie plays or we go in with an all pace attack on the seaming pitches of South Africa.

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by bluechampion
Hayden - opener
Gilchrist - all-rounder
Ponting - best ODI batsman in the world
Bevan - must bat at 4.
Martyn - scores too slowly for my liking.
Lehmann - handy with bat and ball.
Blewett - utility player who could be a match-winner.
Lee - If only he batted more consistently, he'd be the all-rounder.
Warne - hope he's fit.
Gillespie - must stay fit.
McGrath - spearhead.

Maher
- very unlucky not to be in the starting team. Would personally prefer him to Martyn

How about we change that to 'scores to slowly for my perception of fast scoring ODI batsman'.

AC Gilchrist 146 141 5 4684 154 34.44 90.56 8 26 203 34
DS Lehmann 83 75 16 2128 110* 36.06 81.12 2 11 16 -
DR Martyn 106 89 29 2388 144* 39.80 78.55 3 11 37 -
RT Ponting 150 149 19 5411 145 41.62 76.49 10 30 50 -
MG Bevan 188 162 55 5810 108* 54.29 75.18 6 38 61 -
ML Hayden 47 44 6 1602 146 42.15 75.74 2 12 19 -
JP Maher 14 10 2 249 95 31.12 68.40 - 1 6 -

Seems that if some people don't see a ODI batsman come in and start hitting boundaries from ball one they assume that batsman is a slow scorer.

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by bluechampion
Hayden - opener
Gilchrist - all-rounder
Ponting - best ODI batsman in the world
Bevan - must bat at 4.
Martyn - scores too slowly for my liking.
Lehmann - handy with bat and ball.
Blewett - utility player who could be a match-winner.
Lee - If only he batted more consistently, he'd be the all-rounder.
Warne - hope he's fit.
Gillespie - must stay fit.
McGrath - spearhead.

Strongly disagree here. Bevan's unique spot in the team is to get us out of trouble and that usually means batting with the tail. He has to be flexible, but in saying that, most circumstances will see him come in at around no 6.

It isn't as simple as saying, "Bevan has the best average and therefore must bat 4". His batting position isn't about his average, it's about what suits the team as a whole best. And that is at about #6.

[X_box_X]

Considering everyone is fit:

Batting order

1 - Matthew Hayden
2 - Adam Gilchrist
3 - Ricky Ponting
4 - Michael Bevan
5 - Damian Martin
6 - Darren Lehmann
7 - Shane Warne
8 - Brett Lee
9 - Jason Gillespie
10 - Glenn Mcgrath

11th - Justin Langer

12 - Greg Blewett
13 - Shane Watson
14 - Andrew Symmonds
15 - Jimmy Maher

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by X_box_X
Considering everyone is fit:

Batting order

1 - Matthew Hayden
2 - Adam Gilchrist
3 - Ricky Ponting
4 - Michael Bevan
5 - Damian Martin
6 - Darren Lehmann
7 - Shane Warne
8 - Brett Lee
9 - Jason Gillespie
10 - Glenn Mcgrath

11th - Justin Langer

12 - Greg Blewett
13 - Shane Watson
14 - Andrew Symmonds
15 - Jimmy Maher

Yes, I agree. I would definately have Langer batting at 11 (or is that 11th man?). I wouldn't have a back up bowler either. Or maybe I would bring in say Seccombe as a back up bowler. He really gets some pace up you know.

[KevinPoulsen]

1. Matthew Hayden
2. Adam Gilchirst
3. Ricky Ponting
4. Micheal Bevan
5. Micheal Clarke
6. Darren Lehmann
7. Andrew Symonds
8. Shane Warne
9. Brett Lee
10. Jason Gillspie
11. Glenn McGrath
12. Ashley Noffke
13. Mark Higgs
14. Grey Blewett
15. Jimmy Maher
--------
Ryan Campbell
*Reserve Keeper*

[bunsen burner]

I notice that most people prefer bevan at #4. Can someone give me a reason why he should bat #4 instead of #6? This includes justifying who and why the new #6 is.

[larrikin]

Originally posted by KevinPoulsen
1. Matthew Hayden
2. Adam Gilchirst
3. Ricky Ponting
4. Micheal Bevan
5. Micheal Clarke
6. Darren Lehmann
7. Andrew Symonds
8. Shane Warne
9. Brett Lee
10. Jason Gillspie
11. Glenn McGrath
12. Ashley Noffke
13. Mark Higgs
14. Grey Blewett
15. Jimmy Maher
--------
Ryan Campbell
*Reserve Keeper*
You wouldn't even take Martyn with you?

The guy averages just under 40 with a strike rate just under 80.

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by larrikin
You wouldn't even take Martyn with you?

The guy averages just under 40 with a strike rate just under 80.

You mean you haven't noticed that people have their 'favourites' and 'not so favourites' and this will mould their opinions more than talent and form.

It seems that only sandgropers, selectors, and statistics rate Martyn.

[bunsen burner]

I've noticed that most people who I would consider as 'clued up' usually give a reason to justify what they think. Others just just seem to think stuff without even justifying to themselves first.

I'm still waiting for someone to justify why having Bevan at #4 and someone else at #6 is a better option than having Bevan at #6 and someone else at #4?

[Unwritten_Law]

Australian Squad

1. Hayden
2. Gilchrist
3. Ponting
4. Martyn
5. Lehmann
6. Bevan
7. Watson
8. Warne (*)
9. Lee
10. Gillespie
11. McGrath

i.e current team

12. Bichel (Spare Bowler)
13. Symonds (Spare All-Rounder)
14. Maher (Spare Batsman)
15. Noffke (Spare Bowler)

(*) MacGill

[RoosLuver]

Interesting thoughts guys, keep them coming!. Just wondering why some of you dont have somebody like a Ryan Campbell or a Brad Haddin in your side. What happens if Gilchrist is hurt (touch wood), who would do the wicketkeeping if he has to sit out a game or two??

[bluechampion]

Originally posted by bunsen burner
I've noticed that most people who I would consider as 'clued up' usually give a reason to justify what they think. Others just just seem to think stuff without even justifying to themselves first.

I'm still waiting for someone to justify why having Bevan at #4 and someone else at #6 is a better option than having Bevan at #6 and someone else at #4?

I simply do not like his (Martyn's) style of play. It occurs to me that he soaks up too many balls at the start of an innings. Certainly, he scores faster as he progresses, and usually ends up at run-a-ball by the end (much like Bevan), but i still don't like him.

This is a personal preference, but you'd be a fool to think that the selectors don't have personal favourites too.

I do not believe that Bevan and Martyn work in the same team, as they play a similar game. But Bevan has the runs on the board (literally), and the experience in crunch situations. This is not to say that he (Martyn) is not a good ODI batsman, but my preference would be to not include him.

I personally named Bevan at 4 because I believe he benefits from the chance to play his own innings, not have it dictated. If you'll notice, my batting line up is quite long, and while i did not state it earlier (i have in other posts this last week or so), but i believe in flexibility. If then top three go out cheaply, then Blewett moves up the order. If it's 1-220 in the 45th over then Lee comes in to have a go. But, as is the tradition, Batsmen nbeed to be named in an order. I went with Bevan at 4.

At six I have Lehmann, but I'm not really happy with it. Like Martyn and Bevan he would be at his best at 4, but cannot be.


On another topic, I have noticed that many people are finding room for Symonds in ther squad. This is madness. He is the most erratic cricketer alive, and does not deserve the trip after wasting so many chances.

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by RoosLuver
Interesting thoughts guys, keep them coming!. Just wondering why some of you dont have somebody like a Ryan Campbell or a Brad Haddin in your side. What happens if Gilchrist is hurt (touch wood), who would do the wicketkeeping if he has to sit out a game or two?? Ponting if he is out for 1 or 2, Campbell if he is out for the rest of the cup.

It seems there are two choices:

1) Take the risk that Gilly doesn't get injured and take a spare spinner. The logic being that Warnie is much more likely to break down than Gilly. If Gilly goes down, Ponting will have to do.

Risky, but calculated

2) Take Campbell (or Haddin) and don't worry about the second spinner. The logic being that the SA pitches aren't spin friendly, so if Warne goes down, he gets replaced by Bichel or an allrounder.

I originally leant towards choice 1, but after reading bluechampion's post, I'm undecided as of yet. I need more information on the pitches in SA.

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by bluechampion

This is a personal preference, but you'd be a fool to think that the selectors don't have personal favourites too.Yes, but not to the extent that people have on here. A selector wouldn't last that long if they had too many favourites. They also have 3 selectors which prevents people like Elliott and Bevan from being selected in the current test team.

I do not believe that Bevan and Martyn work in the same team, as they play a similar game. But Bevan has the runs on the board (literally), and the experience in crunch situations. This is not to say that he (Martyn) is not a good ODI batsman, but my preference would be to not include him.So who would you replace Martyn with? Doesn't Maher play a similar game to Martyn?


I personally named Bevan at 4 because I believe he benefits from the chance to play his own innings, not have it dictated. Bevan's average is much higher when he bats at #6 rather than #4. It seems Bevan not only bats better when he is being dictated, but is also the BEST player in the world in this situation. So why would we use him in a position that someone else (Martyn, Maher, Lehmann, take your pick) can play just as well, and then have to find someone else to play Bevan's role who would be nowhere near as good as Bevan?


but i believe in flexibilitySo do I.

Let's go over a few different scenarios:

1) 2/33 after 8 overs chasing 239. Why bring in Bevan? Martyn can do just as good a job, and if the shiit hits the fan, Bevan is the one player we want as our last chance.

2) 4/58 after 16 overs chasing 239. I'm sure there isn't one Aussie who would prefer anyone else in the country to walk to the crease in this situation. If this was the score and Bevan went in (and out) at #4, we would have to rely on someone else who isn't nearly as good as Bevan in this situation.

3) 2/200 after 40 overs chasing 239. Bevan isn't needed so it makes no difference.

4) 2/200 after 46 overs chasing 239. Bring on Lee or Warne. Once again, Bevan isn't needed so it makes no difference.


How about I explain it this way:

- If Bevan bats at #4, he will be no better than Martyn or Lehmann.
- But, someone else now has to bat at #6 and it is highly unlikely that this person will be able to bat with the tail and pull Australian out of the mire like Bevan can.
- Why would we put bevan into a position that others can do just as well and deny him the one position that he is much better than anyone else at playing.
- So why would any selector even consider moving Bevan from #6?

[bunsen burner]

Did anyone watch the England v Sri lanka match? I watched a bit and heard an interesting convo between ian Chappell and Ian Healy.

Chappell was basically saying that MacGill should be picked for the Test and World Cup team. The reason being that he can win matches. Chappell believe MacGill will bowl much cheaper in ODIs than his economy rate in Pura Cup.

Healy didn't really disagree about the points but he started beating around the bush and mentioning that whoever is picked has to be able to fit into the team. Read: As good as macGill is, he is a complete ****er and not many of the touring party would be happy playing along side him.

Not surprising, but interesting.

[Minkus_Swan]

My World Cup Squad

1.Adam Gilchrist
2.Matthew Hayden
3.Ricky Ponting
4.Darren Lehmann
5.Damien Martyn
6.Michael Bevan
7.Shane Watson
8.Brett Lee
9.Jason Gillespie
10.Stuart MacGill
11.Glenn McGrath

12.Jimmy Maher
13.Andy Bichel or Brad Williams
14.Greg Blewett
15.Ryan Campbell

I feel that Warne won't recover in time for the World Cup. So take the best wicket taking spinner we have - MacGill. The 11 itself is set in stone - bar injuries to the usual suspects (Gillespie, Lee).

The Rest of the Squad, you want to take good experience players such as Blewett, Maher etc. They complement the side, and are ready for a tournament such as the World Cup.

Not taking a reserve keeper is nonsense, If Ponting has to keep, the side loses the WORLD'S BEST FIELDER.

[larrikin]

Originally posted by bluechampion
I simply do not like his (Martyn's) style of play. It occurs to me that he soaks up too many balls at the start of an innings. Certainly, he scores faster as he progresses, and usually ends up at run-a-ball by the end (much like Bevan), but i still don't like him.


So you're not happy with the number four ending an innings at a run a ball because he takes the time to get his eye in? Well then might I suggest Andrew Symonds or Brad Haddin for that position - surely that will fix the problem.

[Zombie]

1. A.Gilchrist
2. M.Hayden
3. R.Ponting
4. D.Martyn
5. D.Lehmann
6. M.Bevan
7. I.Harvey
8. B.Lee
9. S.MacGill
10. J.Gillespie
11. G.McGrath

12. J.Langer
13. A.Noffke
14. G.Blewett
15. S.Waugh

[Kenny_01]

I don't know if Watson should be in the squad. I think he will get murdered in SA. I'd prefer Blewett in the side, with the 10 overs being split between him, Lehmann, Marto, Bevo or whoever. Watson hardly ever balls his full 10 anyway.

1. Gilchrist
2. Hayden
3. Ponting
4. Martyn
5. Bevan
6. Lehmann
7. Blewett
8. Warne
9. Lee
10. Gillespie
11. McGrath

12. Bichel
13. MacGill
14. Maher
15. Campbell

Unlucky to miss: Langer, Clarke, Watson


I think we should just drop this all rounder thing and play 5 bowlers or 7 batsmen like I did in my squad above.

[Kenny_01]

Actually, I think 5 bowlers would be a good idea.

[BW]

1. A.Gilchrist
2. M.Hayden
3. R.Ponting
4. D.Martyn
5. J.Maher
6. M.Bevan
7. S.Watson
8. B.Lee
9. S.Warne
10. J.Gillespie
11. G.McGrath

12. B.Hogg
13. A.Noffke
14. D.Lehmann
15. S.Waugh

[bluechampion]

Bunsen, I concede.

I have nothing but a personal preference for Bevan to bat at 4. The only thing I have is a belief that He's scored half his centuries when at 4 (the others scored at 6 or 7).

Oh, the shame.

Also, i believe that Maher scores faster than Martyn only because that is how they appear. Statisitcs probably do not back this up. It's simple perception, and as I've said, i simply don't rate Martyn very highly.

But to casue further discussion, I'm of the opinion that Australia should select Cameron White in the 5th Test - just to see how he goes.

[Zombie]

Why the hell would anyone want Jimmy Maher in their WC squad let alone starting 11? What he did in the 'A' match was disgusting and proved to me how much of a tos ser he is, I mean racing your captain to the non danger end and then diving into the crease to make sure you don't get out even though it was the other guys call is pretty low.

Personally I think he is an average bat, he wouldn't bring anything to the squad that isn't already there. As for dropping Martyn for him, that is just stupid, Martyn is twice the batsmen Maher is.

[roostersgal4eva]

1. Hayden
2. Gilchrist
3. Ponting
4. Martyn
5. Lehmann
6. Blewett
7. Bevan
8. Warne(Hauriz if warne unavalable)
9. Lee
10. Gillespie
11. McGrath
------------------------------------
12. Bichel
13. Watson - Been put in far too early, making a mess of his delevopment imho
14. Maher
15. Williams

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by bluechampion

But to casue further discussion, I'm of the opinion that Australia should select Cameron White in the 5th Test - just to see how he goes. I haven't seen enough of White to make an proper opinion, but I suspect that it would be a gamble. I would prefer MacGill play in both tests to give the selectors a chance to have a look at him before the WC. Any blooding of new players should be left until after the WC (except maybe Hauritz in the ODIs).

BTW. I really don't like MacGill as a person (went to school with him), but I don't take that into account when weighing up his talent. I just think he has that extra bit of talent and tunnel-visioned desire that hauritz and Co lack.

[Nige_Bix]

Originally posted by RoosLuver
Ricky Ponting - C
Adam Gilchrist - VC
Michael Bevan
Andy Bichel
Ryan Campbell
Jason Gillespie
Nathan Hauritz
Matty Hayden
Brett Lee
Darren Lehmann
Jimmy Maher
Damien Martyn
Glenn McGrath
Shane Warne - I reckon he will make it
Shane Watson

Opinions welcome!!

I'd agree - almost - but with Hogg getting the nod over Hauritz i'd say he might sneak in.

McGill for the tests but dont think Hohns & Co want him in ODI's.

[Jaymin]

My squad:

1. Hayden
2. Gilchrist
3. Ponting
4. Martyn
5. Lehmann
6. Bevan
7. Blewett
8. Lee
9. Hogg
10. Gillespie
11. McGrath

12. Maher
13. Hauritz
14. Bichel
15. Watson

Warne won't make it....not fully fit anyway...so don't play him.

[Bresh]

Matthew Hayden
Adam Gilchrist
Ricky Ponting
Damien Martyn
Darren Lehmann
Michael Bevan
Jimmy Maher
Brett Lee
Jason Gillespie
Stuart MacGill
Glenn McGrath

Greg Blewett
Andy Bichel
Shane Watson
Justin Langer

[hourn]

1. Adam Gilchrist
2. Matt Hayden
3. Ricky Ponting
4. Michael Bevan
5. Damien Martyn
6. Darren Lehmann
7. Shane Watson
8. Shane Warne (if fit)
9. Brett Lee
10. Jason Gillespie
11. Glenn McGrath

12. Jimmy Maher
13. Andy Symonds
14. Nathan Hauritz
15. Ashley Noffke

(if Warne is unfit go MacGill in the starting 11 - need an attacking spinner, and if there is a situation where Australia wants to play 2 spinners use both Hauritz and MacGill)

Bunsen Burner,

Bevan's average batting at 4 is 60.00 and his average at 6 is 60.44. You can't pull straws and say, "exactly, he's got a higher average at 6" because we all know the difference between 60.00 and 60.44 is negligable.

Also, when you take into account the fact Bevan has a much higher percantage of not outs batting number 6 then batting number 4, you could say that he is perhaps a better number 4 batsmen then number 6.

Also, someone like Lehmann is much more suited to a down the order type role where he can come in with 15-20 overs to go and get moving from the start, whereas Bevan usually takes a good 30 to 40 balls before he starts getting his scoring rate along, which at times can be too late in the innings, while batting at number 4 gives him time to get settled.

Perhaps the more pressing concern for Bevan is that his form has dropped dramatically this year, only averaging a tad over 30, and doesn't seem to be getting better. If it keeps going much longer he'll get the pressure put on him, but he will be there for a while still cause he is arguably the best ODI player ever.

My squad is a pretty stock standard squad, the current 11 starting players who i reckon are doing a pretty good job, with a backup batsmen in Jimmy Maher. I also wouldn't mind experimenting with Maher opening and batting Hayden at 5/6/7.

Andy Symonds the backup batting all rounder and Hauritz the backup spinner, who can bat a bit and Noffke is the choice of quick bowler at the moment, although Bracken is the next man in the picture for mine.

[hourn]

Also, further adding to my reasons behind Bevan at 4, is that if he comes in at 2/10, he can settle the innings down then, instead of coming in and we're say 4/30 and by then its too late to get the innings back on track.

Although i agree if Gilly, Hayden or Ponting go berserk like in the last game, then there is no point in bringing in Bevan with 10 overs to go because he will slow the inninsg down - at the point momentum is needed and someone like Lehmann should come out then and Bevan should move down the list until there are no options left who can score quickly early on.

[bunsen burner]

They're pretty good reasons, but I am still adamant that he is miles better than anyone else at 6, but not miles better than anyone else at 4.

BTW. where did you get your stats for his averages at positions 4 & 6? I was going by memory of a commentary box discussion a few years ago and concluded that bevan's average is much higher at #6.

[Simon_Nesbit]

...or maybe from the past.

What do we need at the World cup?

A guy who can bat the innings, with big hitting late = Hayden/Watson
A guy who can pace the entire innings, without taking too many risks = Ponting/Bevan/Martyn
A guy who can score at a run-a-ball from go = Lehmann
A guy who can go the big hit from go = Gilchrist

Hmm...first 15 overs we want a big hitter....last 10 have been a let-down for us (others seem to push 80+, we make 60-70).

What about:

Hayden (batting aggressively but normally)
Watson/Symonds (Going the tonk, over-the-top early on)
Martyn (batting aggressively, but normally)
Ponting (batting aggressively, but normally)
Bevan (batting aggressively, but normally)
Lehmann (batting aggressively, but normally)
Gilchrist (Going the tonk, over-the-top early on)
...
Bowlers

Basically, Hayden and Watson (or Symonds) open. Target is 70-80 after 10, with Watson have 50 off 30, Hayden run-a-ball. Martyn at three (run-a-ball), then Ponting. Depending on the situation, either Bevan (if earlier than 30 overs), Lehmann (30-40), or Gilchrist (post 40 overs).

Hayden/Watson/Martyn = overs 0-10
Ponting = 10-20
Bevan = 20-30
Lehmann = 30-40
Gilchrist = 40-50

This removes some pressure from Watson in the all-rounder position (removing the 'reliance' on him - if he fails others can do the work), whilst ensuring our 'best' option is going in at the right time.

And having Gilchrist up your sleeve can only be good.

(If we choose to go with 5 bowlers (unlikely IMO), then Martyn would open).

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by Simon_Nesbit


What do we need at the World cup?

A guy who can bat the innings, with big hitting late = Hayden/Watson
A guy who can pace the entire innings, without taking too many risks = Ponting/Bevan/Martyn
A guy who can score at a run-a-ball from go = Lehmann
A guy who can go the big hit from go = Gilchrist



and...

A guy who can win a match off his own back when we are desperate. You can't do this batting at #4.

[EagleBlue]

Gilchrist
Hayden
Ponting
Lehmann
Martyn
Bevan
Watson
Warne
Lee
Gillespie
McGrath

12. Blewett
13. Bichel
14. Maher
15. Hauritz

If Warne not fit. Play Hauritz. Add McGill to squad

[hourn]

I got those stats from CricInfo - Bevan - ODI player (http://statserver.cricket.org/perl/sdb/sdb_player.pl?playerid=2167&class=odiplayer&filter=basic&team=0&opposition=0&notopposition=0&season=0&homeaway=0&continent=0&country=0&notcountry=0&groundid=0&startdefault=1994-04-14&start=1994-04-14&enddefault=2002-12-15&end=2002-12-15&tourneyid=0&finals=0&daynight=0&toss=0&scheduledovers=0&scheduleddays=0&innings=0&result=0&followon=0&seriesresult=0&captain=0&keeper=0&dnp=0&recent=&viewtype=bat_summary&runslow=&runshigh=&batposition=0&dismissal=0&bowposition=0&ballslow=&ballshigh=&bpof=0&overslow=&overshigh=&conclow=&conchigh=&wicketslow=&wicketshigh=&dismissalslow=&dismissalshigh=&caughtlow=&caughthigh=&caughttype=0&stumpedlow=&stumpedhigh=&csearch=&submit=1) that particular position stat is towards the middle-bottom area.

How can a player not win a game off his back from number 4. There is more chance of doing so because a batsmen gets more time to get settled and pace his innings before going for it at the end like Bevan tends to do.

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by hourn


How can a player not win a game off his back from number 4. There is more chance of doing so because a batsmen gets more time to get settled and pace his innings before going for it at the end like Bevan tends to do. I don't think you understand what I'm trying to say.

Just answer me this question:

If Australia are 5/87 after 20 overs chasing 219, who would you prefer to be at the crease? You can pick any batsmen in the world.

[hourn]

Originally posted by bunsen burner
I don't think you understand what I'm trying to say.

Just answer me this question:

If Australia are 5/87 after 20 overs chasing 219, who would you prefer to be at the crease? You can pick any batsmen in the world.

Obviousbly Bevan.

But if Australia are 2/30 i'd like Bevan to come in then and stop the rut at that point rather than let it go onto 5/87 when things are just about to impossible to curb. Don't you think that would be a little more ideal??

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by hourn
Obviousbly Bevan.

But if Australia are 2/30 i'd like Bevan to come in then and stop the rut at that point rather than let it go onto 5/87 when things are just about to impossible to curb. Don't you think that would be a little more ideal??

Do you really think if we put Martyn in at #4, we would be risking losing the game? But you want to put Bevan in at #4 and risk losing the games where the top 5 don't fire?


By putting Bevan at #4 we probably wouldn't win extra games - we would just lose more of the games when the top five fail. I fail to see a profit here.

We're not really any better off with bevan at #4. Not only are we not better off, but we are in fact worse off.

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by hourn
Obviousbly Bevan.

But if Australia are 2/30 i'd like Bevan to come in then and stop the rut at that point rather than let it go onto 5/87 when things are just about to impossible to curb. Don't you think that would be a little more ideal??

- Do you think that Bevan can stop the rut every time?

- What happens when it is 5/87 and Bevan is in the pavillion?

- You can't avoid these situations, and God help us if it is in a knockout WC match. This is why Bevan has to bat down the order. We would be mad to have that luxury and not use it.

[hourn]

Originally posted by bunsen burner
Do you really think if we put Martyn in at #4, we would be risking losing the game? But you want to put Bevan in at #4 and risk losing the games where the top 5 don't fire?


By putting Bevan at #4 we probably wouldn't win extra games - we would just lose more of the games when the top five fail. I fail to see a profit here.

We're not really any better off with bevan at #4. Not only are we not better off, but we are in fact worse off.


If the top 5 fail then it doesn't matter who you've got - your going to struggle to win.

By putting Bevan at 4 my theory is it simply gives us something to fall back on earlier and to stop the rut earlier. I think in the end we'd probably have teh same results, as there may be times when Bevan gets out and were 3for not much and in all soughts, but there may be other times where Bevan gets himself stuck in and guides us to a good score if you know what i mean.

I dont think it would change too much and the end "net" result would be basically the same.

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by hourn
If the top 5 fail then it doesn't matter who you've got - your going to struggle to win.This is my whole point. You seem to have forgotten the times that Bevan has won us a game from this position.

Any other situation won't really matter whether Martyn or Bevan goes in - like you said the result will be roundabout the same. But those few times when we are in a rut, it is better to have Bevan in the centre rather than the pavillion. It only takes one WC knockout match to make it worthwhile bevan batting at #6.

Now let's see if you can follow this logic:

99% of games = no real difference if Bevan or Martyn bat at #4. Over time we would be likely to win about the same amount of games.

1% of games = If Bevan bats at #4 at gets out, we have a very distinguishable higher chance of losing. If he bats at #6, we have a chance of winning - BECAUSE HE HAS DONE MORE TIMES THAN ANY OTHER PLAYER.

What if this 1%er was a WC qtr final, semi final, or final? Would it be worth batting Bevan at #4 all summer to risk a higher chance of losing an important game?

[bunsen burner]

One more question:

Everyone thinks Ricky Ponting and Dean Jones are great ODI cricketers. But can you pinpoint specific deeds in specific matches that make them great? Probably not. You could single out Ponting's fielding and Jones ball placement, but you can't pinpoint certain matches.

Everyone thinks Michael Bevan is a great ODI cricketer. But can you pinpoint specific deeds in specific matches that make them great? YES. Nearly every person in the country associates Bevan with those two innings where he won matches from unwinnable positions - off his own bat.

This is what Bevan made his name on. This is his strength. This is also a strength of the team.

And you want to ignore that and play him at #4???????